111! 


'  -i:;  ia.'C  ‘■W 


4.1.^ 


:*’4  /''■ 

■rsip?'  4 


if,’?.  .‘f‘.  .’w 


"ij- '.;:• 


,  1^:> 


•  :  ,5.? 4  i^-.  „  ,'...  !  _■ 


r.  -  ■  \»»  •  .-  . 

t'-->fi^;-"’‘'  ■  -'  '  •  ■■  ■,-  *-  ■ 


■:  \vW.  • 


S'>%. ' 

Vi-’i  •>'■  -V  ■ 


Ei:' . '',  ;■ 

mM 

11^1' 


■  “?  •;ril-i-*-i*>i'j  ./■!  i 


r, 


ii’lf.'-V’  I'-:  ,( 


^  V  '■;  i‘H" '  ■  *  ■• ' . 

^  'v 

'■■'  '  ■■*' V  .'-- 


I  a'V-.- V- ; 


jf*i'  it.  ■•  ■.:■•■ 

-■.*».■'••  -;.f 


ft 


1^1  I 


.’i 


The  office  of 


Public  Defender 


Letters  from  Walton  J.  Wood,  Public 
Defender,  to  Bar  Associations  of 
New  York  and  Milwaukee  i$ 


Comments  of  the  District  Attorney, 
Judges  and  the  Press  of  Los  Angeles 


Los  Angeles  County  Charter  Provisions 


•,. 

•■WV 


' 


•^; 


>» 


5-'  •••<*  ,’*'  T.  • 

I  .''A'  -  ^'4":.:-,:, 


Return  this  book  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 


University  of  Illinois  Library 


OEC 

1 

CO 

■•■mm 

CO 

- - 

r- 

22  135? 

^.1  t 

K  W'  i 

MAR  26 


im 


24  \m 


L161  — H41 


THE  OFHCE  OF 


PUBLIC  DEFENDER 


Letters  from  Walton  J.  Wood,  Public  Defender,  to  Bar 
Associations  of  New  York  and  Milwaukee 


Comments  of  the  District  Attorney,  Judges  and  the  Press 

of  Los  Angeles 


Los  Angeles  County  Charter  Provisions 


SECOND  EDITION 


JUNE  1914 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2018  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/officeofpublicdeOOwood 


%  \ 


3  ^3 

f-i/4 


OFFICETOF 

THE  PUBLIC  DEFENDER 

LOS  ANGELES  COUNTY 


Los  Angeles,  Cal.,  June  3,  1914. 


Terence  J.  McManus,  Esq., 

Secretary  Committee  on  Criminal  Procedure, 

New  York  County  Lawyers’  Association, 

New  York,  N.  Y. 

Dear  Sir : 

So  many  calls  have  come  to  my  office  for  the  pamphlet 
which  we  recently  published  concerning  the  work  of  the  public 
defender  that  the  original  edition  has  been  exhausted.  In  order 
to  comply  with  the  request  of  your  committee  for  thirty  copies 
of  the  pamphlet  it  has  been  necessary  to  prepare  a  second  edi¬ 
tion.  I  am  very  glad  that  the  Lawyers’  Association  of  New  York 
has  taken  up  this  matter  and  I  will  be  pleased  to  furnish  any 
further  information  available. 

It  has  occurred  to  me  that  a  possible  objection  might  be 
raised  by  some  who  might  think  that  the  public  defender  is  a 
counterpart  of  the  district  attorney  and  would  naturally  endeavor 
to  undo  the  work  of  the  prosecuting  officer.  This,  however,  is 
far  from  the  true  conception  of  the  office.  In  considering  this 
matter  great  emphasis  should  be  placed  upon  the  fact  that  the 
public  defender  is  not  the  reverse  of  the  district  attorney.  It  is 
not  his  duty  to  undermine  the  work  of  the  prosecutor,  nor  to 
secure  acquittals  regardless  of  the  merits  of  the  case.  It  is  his 
duty,  however,  to  bring  out  the  facts  and  the  law  in  favor  of 
the  accused.  Wherever  the  defendant  is  not  able  to  employ  his 
own  attorney  the  office  of  the  public  defender  is  the  proper  means 
of  investigating  the  facts  in  his  behalf  and  presenting  them  to 
the  court.  The  work  of  the  public  defender  is  not  experimental. 
Constitutions  and  state  laws  have  long  guaranteed  to  accused 


persons  an  ample  defense  and  a  qualified  attorney  to  represent 
them.  In  many  states  a  small  fee  is  allowed  by  statute  to  the 
attorney  appointed  by  the  court.  In  other  states,  California 
among  them,  no  fee  whatever  is  provided  by  law  for  the  attor¬ 
ney  and  no  means  whatever  provided  for  defraying  the  expenses 
of  preparing  the  defense.  The  creation  of  the  office  of  public 
defender  simply  puts  on  a  reasonable  and  efficient  basis  the  de¬ 
fense  which  the  law  has  always  pretended  to  safeguard. 

In  Los  Angeles  the  district  attorney  and  the  public  defender 
are  working  harmoniously  together.  We  are  doing  what  the  dis¬ 
trict  attorney  tried  to  do  in  many  cases  but  which,  on  account 
of  conditions  which  could  not  be  overcome,  he  was  unable  to 
do.  [%e  are  daily  advising  the  accused  of  their  rights.  We  are 
informing  them  of  the  law  covering  the  crime  of  which  they  may 
be  charged.  We  are  listening  to  their  side  of  the  story  and  are 
bringing  out  whatever  points  there  may  be  in  favor  of  the  de¬ 
fendants,  at  the  same  time  doing  nothing  to  hamper  or  delay 
the  administration  of  justice.  Many  of  our  clients  come  by  rec¬ 
ommendation  from  the  office  of  the  district  attorney,  others  come 
from  officials  at  the  county  jail  and  others  at  the  request  of  the 
judges. 

As  an  example  of  the  co-operation  of  the  District  Attorney 
and  the  Public  Defender  I  might  cite  the  case  of  Frank  Walden, 
who  is  now  awaiting  trial  on  a  charge  of  murder.  The  only  possi¬ 
ble  defense  for  Walden  is  insanity  and  there  is  a  serious  doubt 
as  to  his  mental  condition.  It  has  been  the  universal  custom 
in  cases  of  this  kind  for  each  side  to  employ  alienists,  and  it  is 
well  known  that  in  very  many  cases  alienists  are  employed  who 
are  known  to  be  prone  to  favor  the  side  that  employs  them.  The 
District  Attorney  and  the  Public  Defender  in  this  case  have 
united  in  asking  the  court  to  appoint  three  able  alienists  who 
will  serve  as  the  only  expert  witnesses  in  the  case.  This  marks 
a  new  step  in  the  administration  of  justice,  at  least  in  this  part 
of  the  country.  We  are  taking  the  best  method  of  arriving  at 
the  truth. 

I  call  attention  to  the  statement  in  the  letter  of  Judge  Willis 
that  our  office  ‘ffias  been  a  great  saving  to  the  county  in  the  mat¬ 
ter  of  expense.”  This  is  a  very  remarkable  statement,  yet  I  be¬ 
lieve  it  is  absolutely  true.  We  have  had  a  number  of  cases  dis¬ 
missed  by  talking  frankly  with  the  District  Attorney  and  showing 
him  that  a  trial  would  result  in  acquittal.  He  has,  in  such  cases. 


dismissed  the  prosecution.  In  other  cases  we  have  been  able  to 
avoid  delays  and  by  having  attorneys  who  are  familiar  with  crim¬ 
inal  procedure  in  court  at  all  times  the  Court  has  been  able  to 
dispatch  business  much  more  rapidly.  In  the  matter  of  expense 
the  same  condition  to  some  extent  prevails  in  the  civil  department 
of  our  work,  where  we  relieve  the  courts  of  many  contested  cases 
by  adjusting  them  without  filing  suit. 

Civil  matters  continue  to  require  about  half  of  the  time  of 
the  office  force.  Too  much  emphasis  can  not  be  put  upon  the 
importance  of  this  department  of  our  work.  We  have  all  heard 
people  of  limited  means  say  that  the  courts  are  only  for  the 
wealthy.  Thinking  people  have  realized  that  a  very  large  pro¬ 
portion  of  our  citizens  are  regarding  the  courts  in  this  light. 
When  we  consider  that  so  many  of  our  citizens  are  wage  earn¬ 
ers  who  have  small  legal  difficulties  and  that  it  costs  more  to 
solve  these  difficulties  than  can  be  obtained  by  the  remedy,  it  is 
not  surprising  that  the  opinion  is  so  prevalent  that  the  courts 
are  only  for  the  wealthy. 

(Out  office  does  a  great  deal  to  help  this  condition  by  reduc¬ 
ing  the  expense  to  a  minimum.  We  are  daily  adjusting  disputes 
between  wage  earners  and  employers  and  between  others  who 
are  financially  unable  to  employ  attorneys.  In  most  cases  both 
sides  are  willing  to  trust  the  decision  of  the  public  defender. 

As  an  example  of  what  our  office  can  accomplish  I  might 
cite  the  case  of  one  E.  R — ,  who  was  convicted  of  a  misdemeanor 
in  one  of  the  courts  in  which  we  are  not  authorized  to  appear 
and  sentenced  to  serve  one  hundred  days  in  the  county  jail.  His 
offense  consisted  in  selling  a.  ticket  for  a  raffle  on  his  watch, 
without  a  license.  At  the  time  of  his  arrest  he  was  without 
funds  and  had  been  ill  for  some  time,  having  lost  his  employ¬ 
ment  on  that  account.  He  had  a  wife  who  was  dependent  upon 
him  for  support,  she  being  crippled  and  almost  unable  to  walk. 
In  desperation  he  took  this  means  of  raising  funds  and  was 
promptly  arrested.  His  wife  was  cared  for  by  a  friend  who  was 
not  financially  able  to  bear  the  expense.  After  R —  had  served 
about  one  month  of  his  time  the  lady  who  had  befriended  his 
wife,  being  no  longer  able  to  support  her,  appealed  to  the  dis¬ 
trict  attorney  in  an  effort  to  secure  his  release.  The  law  did 
not  make  provision  for  the  district  attorney  or  the  public  de¬ 
fender  or  any  other  official  to  present  the  application  for  parole. 


There  being  no  other  official  to  attend  to  this  matter,  Mr.  W. 
J.  Ford,  Chief  Deputy  District  Attorney,  in  the  interest  of  jus¬ 
tice,  addressed  to  this  office  the  following  communication: 

Los  Angeles,  April  30,  1914. 

Mr.  Walton  J.  Wood, 

Public  Defender, 

Hall  of  Records. 

Dear  Sir: 

We  are  frequently  asked  to  grant  parole  to  prisoners  who 
are  not  represented  by  counsel,  and  as  a  consequence  the  paroles 
presented  by  this  class  of  persons  are  seldom  in  accord  with  the 
rules  and  regulations  of  the  Parole  Commission. 

We  require  that  the  prisoner  make  an  application,  setting 
forth  the  details  of  the  crime,  etc.,  according  to  the  provisions 
of  subdivision  3  of  the  document  hereunto  attached.  We  also 
require  papers  from  the  judge  of  the  court,  the  arresting  officer 
and,  usually,  from  the  prosecuting  witness ;  and  so  far  as  this 
office  individually  is  concerned  we  require  a  report  from  the 
sheriff  or  jailer  concerning  the  prisoner’s  conduct  while  in  jail. 

I  have  referred  the  present  application  to  the  sheriff  and 
asked  him  to  indicate  his  approval  by  signing  the  parole  before 
I  would  agree  to  sign  same.  Mr.  Hammel  is  unwilling  to  do 
this  unless  we  signify  our  desire  to  grant  the  parole.  I  am 
therefore  referring  the  bearer  to  you  in  the  hope  that  you  may 
find  it  consistent  with  the  duties  of  your  office  to  grant  the  re¬ 
quired  aid  to  this  lady. 

As  these  paroles  are  applicable  only  to  misdemeanor  cases, 
it  may  be  that  you  consider  it  technically  outside  the  scope  of 
your  authority ;  but  I  know  of  no  other  office  which  can  give 
the  matter  the  same  intelligent  attention  that  it  deserves,  unless 
the  applicant  has  means  to  employ  an  attorney,  in  which  case 
of  course  I  would  not  expect  you  to  help  them  in  the  matter. 

Yours  very  truly, 

J.  D.  FREDERICKS,  District  Attorney, 

By  W.  J.  Ford,  Chief  Deputy. 

We  at  once  investigated  the  matter,  and  following  the  legal 
requirements  in  matters  of  this  kind,  we  secured  Mr.  R — ’s  re¬ 
lease.  Once  out  of  jail,  however,  he  was  in  but  little  better  con¬ 
dition  than  before — out  of  employment,  without  funds  and  with 


a  crippled  wife.  In  addition  to  this  his  former  landlady  refused 
to  allow  him  to  return  to  the  house  which  he  had  been  renting 
and  also  refused  to  allow  him  to  remove  his  personal  efifects, 
inasmuch  as  he  was  indebted  to  her  in  a  small  sum  for  room 
rent.  He  sought  the  help  of  David  R.  Paries,  Assistant  Public 
Defender,  who  made  him  a  small  loan,  secured  employment  for 
him  and  took  steps  to  release  his  personal  efifects  from  the  land¬ 
lady,  who  had  no  legal  right  to  retain  them,  at  the  same  time 
making  arrangements  with  the  landlady  for  her  to  receive  the 
amount  due.  Shortly  thereafter  R —  earned  enough  money  to 
repay  the  loan  to  Mr.  Paries  and  to  settle  his  difficulties. 

This  case  illustrates  three  things  which  our  office  is  doing: 
Pirst,  we  worked  in  co-operation  with  the  district  attorney’s 
office ;  second,  we  performed  a  service  which  no  other  official 
could  do ;  and  third,  we  brought  about  redress  in  a  civil  matter 
in  a  case  in  which  the  party  interested  was  entirely  unable  to 
do  anything  for  himself. 

Many  magazines  and  newspapers  throughout  the  country 
have  commented  on  our  work  and  in  every  case  which  has  come 
to  our  attention  the  comments  have  been  favorable.  Notable 
among  the  magazines  which  have  endorsed  the  work  being  un¬ 
dertaken  by  our  office  are  The  World’s  Work,  May,  1914,  and 
The  Outlook,  March  28,  1914. 

In  Los  Angeles  there  are  four  departments  of  the  Superior 
Court  which  are  handling  criminal  cases.  Two  of  these,  presided 
over  by  Judges  Willis  and  Craig,  are  devoted  entirely  to  crim¬ 
inal  cases,  and  two  others,  in  which  Judges  Taft  and  Monroe  pre¬ 
side,  devote  part  of  their  time  to  the  dispatch  of  criminal  mat¬ 
ters.  I  am  appending  hereto  letters  from  these  four  judges,  giv¬ 
ing  their  views  of  the  work  we  are  doing.  I  am  also  enclosing 
a  letter  from  the  district  attorney  of  Los  Angeles  County  and 
letters  from  Judges  Sidney  N.  Reeve  and  John  W.  Summerfield 
who  have  handled  a  number  of  civil  matters  which  have  come 
to  our  office  and  who  are  well  informed  concerning  the  civil 
side  of  our  work. 

All  of  the  newspapers  in  Los  Angeles  hkve  given  support 
to  the  work  of  the  public  defender.  The  RECORD  publishes  a 
column  in  which  citizens  are  often  referred  to  this  office  for  civil 
redress.  The  EXAMINER  and  The  HERALD  have  given  pub- 


licity  to  our  work  and  have  shown  their  good-will  in  other  ways* 
I  am  appending  hereto  excerpts  from  articles  published  in  THE 
TIMES,  THE  TRIBUNE,  THE  EXPRESS  and  THE  CALI¬ 
FORNIA  OUTLOOK. 

The  number  of  cases  being  handled  by  the  office  is  steadily 
increasing.  At  the  date  of  the  publication  of  the  first  edition  of 
this  pamphlet,  Alarch  17,  1914,  the  average  number  of  civil  cases 
each  day  was  between  nineteen  and  twenty.  In  the  month  of 
May,  with  twenty-five  working  days,  there  were  627  matters,  an 
average  of  twenty-five  per  work  day.  Between  January  14th 
and  May  31st,  we  handled  one  hundred  and  sixty  criminal  cases, 
of  which  forty-three  camedo  us  in  the  month  of  May. 

Let  me  express  the  hope  that  the  office  of  public  defender 
will  soon  be  created  in  New  York  and  I  know  that  the  work  of 
the  office  will  be  as  satisfactory  to  the  people  of  New  York  as 
it  has  been  to  the  people  of  Los  Angeles. 

Yours  very  respectfully, 

WALTON  J.  WOOD, 

Public  Defender. 


OFFICE  OF 


THE  PUBLIC  DEFENDER 

LOS  ANGELES  COUNTY 


Los  Angeles,  Cal.,  March  17,  1914. 


A.  C.  Umbreit,  Esq., 

Chairman  Committee  on  Public  Defender, 

Railway  Exchange  Building,  Milwaukee,  Wis. 

Dear  Sir : — 

In  response  to  the  request  of  the  special  committee  of  the 
Milwaukee  Bar  Association  appointed  to  investigate  the  matter 
of  the  appointment  of  a  public  defender  for  Milwaukee  I  am 
enclosing  a  copy  of  the  provisions  of  the  charter  of  the  county 
of  Los  Angeles  prescribing  the  duties  of  the  public  defender. 

While  the  legislature  of  the  state  has  authority  to  create  the 
office  of  public  defender  for  all  counties  no  action  has  been  taken 
by  the  legislature  up  to  the  present  time  except  to  ratify  the 
charter  of  Los  Angeles  County  providing  for  the  office.  Under 
our  constitution  each  county  can  form  its  own  charter,  which 
must  be  adopted  by  vote  of  the  people  and  ratified  by  the  legis¬ 
lature.  During  the  last  year  the  people  of  Los  Angeles  County 
adopted  a  charter  providing  for  the  appointment  of  a  public 
defender  and  his  deputies  from  the  eligible  civil  service  list. 
Pursuant  to  this  charter  provision  I  was  appointed  on  January  6, 
1914. 

CChe  work  of  the  public  defender  is  naturally  divided  into 
two  classes,  the  criminal  and  civil.  In  criminal  matters  we 
defend  every  person  accused  of  any  offense  in  the  Superior  Court 
who  is  financially  unable  to  employ  an  attorney,  upon  his  request 
or  upon  order  of  the  court.  It  is  also  our  duty  to  prosecute 


appeals  in  proper  cases.  No  provision  is  made  for  our  appear¬ 
ance  in  the  police  courts.  Probably  this  is  explained  by  the  fact 
that  the  City  of  Los  Angeles  has  its  own  charter  providing  for 
police  courts.  The  city  provides  prosecutors  for  all  cases  in¬ 
volving  violations  of  the  law  which  amount  only  to  misde¬ 
meanors,  whether  they  are  violations  of  city  ordinances  or  of 
the  state  law.  An  amendment  to  the  city  charter  would  be 
necessary  to  provide  for  the  appearance  of  the  public  defender 
in  the  police  courts  of  the  city.  However,  a  voluntary  public 
defender  is  now  at  work  in  the  police  courts.  It  seems  to  me 
that  there  is  need  for  a  public  defender  in  every  court  where 
the  government  provides  an  attorney  to  prosecute. 

When  we  bear  in  mind  that  in  nearly  every  criminal  prosecu¬ 
tion  in  this  state  one  citizen  is  arrested  upon  the  complaint  of 
another,  and  that  the  law  provides  an  attorney  to  take  the  side 
of  the  complaining  witness,  it  is  astonishing  that  no  provision  has 
been  heretofore  made  for  a  more  effective  method  of  bringing  out 
the  points  in  favor  of  the  accused.  It  cannot  be  doubted  but 
that  the  public  demands  convictions  of  the  district  attorney, 
demands  that  he  prosecute  vigorously,  demands  that  he  repre¬ 
sent  but  one  side.  Indeed,  the  law  itself  prescribes  the  duties 
of  the  district  attorney,  provides  that  he  must  prosecute  and 
must  present  the  evidence  against  accused  persons.  No  provision 
is  made,  however,  for  him  to  defend.  The  law  has  always  recog¬ 
nized  the  right  of  the  accused  to  be  defended.  If  he  has  money 
he  can  employ  his  own  counsel  and  conduct  his  own  defense. 
If  he  has  no  money  the  court  appoints  an  attorney  for  him.  In  a 
great  majority  of  cases  these  appointments  fall  to  inexperienced 
youths  who  seek  the  appointment  for  the  purpose  of  gaining 
experience.  In  some  cases  more  experienced  attorneys  are 
appointed,  but  they  receive  no  remuneration  for  their  work  and 
it  is  hardly  to  be  expected  that  they  will  give  the  work  the  same 
degree  of  diligence  and  care  that  should  be  given.  In  fact, 
experience  has  shown,  and  there  is  no  reason  whatever  to  doubt 
it,  that  a  person  accused  of  crime,  under  the  old  system,  could 
not  expect  to  get  adequate  representation.  The  government 
employs  a  skilled,  experienced  and  ambitious  attorney  to  present 
the  case  against  the  accused.  The  defendant  has  a  right  to  enter 
the  court  on  an  equal  footing  with  his  adversary.  Under  the 
old  system  it  was  impossible  for  the  defendant  to  get  the  equal 
protection  of  the  law. 


It  has  been  contended  by  some  that  the  district  attorney 
himself  can  safeguard  the  interests  of  those  who  are  unable  to 
employ  counsel.  Doubtless  more  care  is  taken  by  prosecuting 
officers  in  cases  against  the  indigent  than  in  other  cases,  and 
very  properly  so.  Both  in  theory,  and  in  practice,  however,  it  is 
impossible  for  the  prosecutor  to  represent  both  sides.  Under  the 
law  it  is  his  duty  to  prosecute ;  no  provision  is  made  for  him  to 
defend.  If  one  officer  could  act  for  both  sides  there  would  be  no 
need  for  either  a  prosecutor  or  a  defender,  for  the  judge  could 
handle  the  matter  alone.  In  practice  the  prosecutor  cannot 
represent  the  accused,  for  long  usage  has  so  defined  his  duties 
that  public  opinion,  the  ultimate  arbiter  in  popular  government, 
demands  a  vigorous  prosecution. 

Prosecuting  attorneys  daily  are  pitted  against  able  lawyers 
employed  by  accused  persons  of  means.  They  necessarily  be¬ 
come  skillful,  wary  and  vigorous  in  the  conduct  of  the  cases.  It 
would  not  be  natural  to  expect  a  sudden  change  from  the  habit 
thus  formed  upon  the  arraignment  of  an  indigent  defendant. 
In  a  decision  rendered  during  the  month  of  February  last  by  the 
Supreme  Court  of  this  state  the  following  language  is  used : 

“The  prosecutor  improperly  commented  upon  the  action  of 
the  defendant  in  objecting,  as  he  had  an  undoubted  right  to  under 
the  law,  to  his  wife’s  testifying  against  him.  It  is  to  be  regretted 
that  prosecuting  counsel,  in  the  heat  of  contest  and  the  desire  for 
victory,  sometimes  forget  that  the  function  of  a  district  attorney 
is  largely  judicial,  and  that  he  owes  to  the  defendant  as  solemn 
duty  of  fairness  as  he  is  bound  to  give  to  the  state  full  measure 
of  earnestness  and  fervor  in  the  performance  of  his  official  obli¬ 
gations. 

“Again  and  again  this  court  has  commented  upon  the  course 
of  prosecutors  in  this  regard,  but  instances  of  such  conduct  are 
all  too  common.  We  have  no  doubt  that  in  the  present  case  the 
prosecutor’s  demeanor  and  his  improper  questions  deprived  the 
defendant  of  that  fair  trial  which  ought  to  have  been  his  under 
the  law.  For  this  reason  he  should  not  be  subjected  to  the  result 
of  a  verdict  so  induced.” 

Truly  in  such  a  case,  if  the  defendant  had  been  unable  to 
employ  counsel,  justice  would  demand  that  a  competent  attorney 
safeguard  his  interests. 

As  an  example  of  the  work  which  the  public  defender  can 
do,  I  might  cite  the  case  of  Fred  Lacy.  This  man  had  pleaded 


guilty  in  the  Superior  Court  at  San  Jose  of  the  crime  of  forgery 
and  was  released  on  probation  by  the  judge,  who  knew  that  there 
was  a  charge  pending  against  him  for  a  similar  offense  in  Los 
Angeles  County.  The  San  Jose  judge  released  the  man  in  view 
of  both  of  these  charges,  but,  under  the  law,  he  could  not  free 
him  from  the  charge  in  Los  Angeles  County  and  was  compelled 
to  turn  him  over  to  the  Los  Angeles  officer.  Lacy  was  brought 
to  Los  Angeles  seriously  afflicted  with  tuberculosis.  Life  at  the 
county  jail  was  fast  tearing  him  down,  yet  it  seemed  that  he 
would  be  in  jail  from  one  to  two  months  before  his  case  could 
be  disposed  of.  He  learned  of  my  appointment,  through  a  turn¬ 
key  at  the  jail,  and  his  was  one  of  the  first  cases  that  I  handled. 
Upon  his  telling  me  the  facts  I  went  to  the  district  attorney’s 
office  and  the  district  attorney  very  promptly  took  steps  to  have 
the  charge  against  him  dismissed.  Lacy  was  in  great  need  of 
hospital  treatment  and  we  helped  him  to  get  into  a  hospital. 
Probably  a  month  or  two  in  jail  would  have  been  so  injurious 
that  he  could  not  have  recovered. 

Most  of  the  accused  persons  are  afraid  to  talk  freely  with 
the  district  attorney.  In  many  cases  their  troubles  can  be  ad¬ 
justed,  or  investigation  will  show  that  they  should  be  charged 
with  lesser  offenses  to  which  they  would  be  willing  to  plead 
guilty.  [The  public  defender  can  hear  their  stories  and  try  to 
bring  out  justice  for  all^^ 

I  have  found  the  district  attorney  and  his  deputies  all  very 
willing  to  co-operate  with  the  public  defender  in  his  work.  Both 
officers  should  remember  that  we  are  the  servants  of  all  the 
people,  that  both  want  to  bring  about  the  same  result,  the  fair 
administration  of  the  law.  While  the  law  imposes  upon  the 
district  attorney  the  duty  of  presenting  the  evidence  against  the 
accused  person,  and  upon  the  public  defender  the  duty  of  pre¬ 
senting  the  evidence  in  his  favor,  the  law  does  not  ask  the  district 
attorney  to  convict  an  innocent  person,  nor  does  it  ask  the  public 
defender  to  acquit  a  guilty  person.  Both  can  present  their  re¬ 
spective  sides  in  the  most  intelligent  and  fair  manner.  It  is  then 
a  question  for  the  jury  and  the  court  to  decide. 

Often  a  defendant  in  a  criminal  case  is  willing  to  plead 
guilty,  when  in  fact  he  has  committed  no  crime  or  is  mentally 
irresponsible.  The  plea  of  guilty  involves  questions  of  law  as 
well  as  fact,  but  the  accused  does  not  realize  this.  In  one  case 
in  which  I  defended  a  man  accused  of  murder  he  admitted  killing 


his  opponent  and  through  ignorance  was  willing  to  enter  a  plea 
of  guilty.  There  would  be  danger  That  an  attorney  might  allow 
the  plea  to  be  entered  and  thus  save  himself  labor.  Upon  investi¬ 
gation,  however,  it  was  shown  that  the  man  had  killed  in  self- 
defense  and  was  acquitted.  In  seme  cases  the  defendants  are  in¬ 
sane,  yet  their  insanity  is  not  apparent  except  upon  investigation. 
In  the  short  time  I  have  been  in  office  two  persons  accused  of 
crime  have  been  declared  insane  and  sent  to  state  institutions. 
In  both  cases  the  accused  had  committed  the  acts  of  which  they 
were  charged. 

Cases  have  been  brought  to  my  attention  where  certain  law¬ 
yers  have  hung  about  the  jails  offering  their  services  to  men 
accused  of  crime  and  who  were  unable  to  send  for  the  attorneys 
they  really  wanted  to  employ.  Some  of  these  attorneys  have 
taken  the  few  cents  that  the  accused  might  have  upon  his  person 
at  the  time  of  his  arrest,  then,  after  taking  over  the  case,  have  ad¬ 
vised  the  defendant  to  plead  guilty.  I  heard  of  one  case  where 
the  attorney  seeking  employment  obtained  a  promissory  note 
from  the  defendant  for  a  large  sum  of  money.  He  then  advised 
the  defendant  to  plead  guilty  with  the  hope  of  getting  released  on 
probation.  This  was  done,  but  upon  the  defendant’s  being  al¬ 
lowed  to  leave  jail  he  was  hounded  by  the  attorney  who  held  the 
promissory  note  alleged  to  be  due  for  services  which  were  never 
in  fact  rendered. 

One  of  the  most  important  things  the  public  defender  can 
do  is  to  give  advice  to  the  poor  concerning  their  rights,  to  be 
always  ready  to  be  at  their  call  so  that  they  may  know  there  is 
an  officer  with  whom  they  can  talk  freely. 

Many  a  man  accused  of  crime  does  not  know  that  the  law 
allows  him  ample  time  to  make  a  defense,  that  he  cannot  be  held 
indefinitely  without  a  charge  being  filed  against  him  and  that  the 
state  must  prove  certain  well  defined  things  in  order  to  make 
out  the  crime  of  vagrancy.  ^lany  innocent  men  plead  guilty 
because  some  official  offers  them  the  minimum  fine. 

Even  when  the  accused  pleads  guilty  and  asks  for  probation, 
the  public  defender  can  be  of  great  assistance.  As  an  example 
I  might  cite  the  case  of  People  vs.  Harris  and  McCormick,  two 
men  who  were  arrested  in  Pomona  for  burglary  in  the  early  part 
of  January.  I  was  called  upon  to  defend  these  men  and  both 
pleaded  guilty.  It  was  ascertained,  however,  that  they  were 
nearly  starved  at  the  time  they  committed  the  offense;  that  they 


had  gone  from  house  to  house  seeking  employment  and  asking 
for  food.  They  asserted  that  they  entered  the  house  for  the 
purpose  of  stealing  something  to  eat.  I  investigated  to  find  if 
their  stories  were  true  when  they  told  of  seeking  employment 
and  food.  I  wrote  letters  to  the  people  whose  names  they  gave 
me  as  having  provided  work  or  food  for  them  and  I  found  in 
each  case  that  these  men  were  telling  the  truth,  that  they  had  in 
fact  diligently  tried  to  get  something  to  do.  The  result  was  that 
one  of  the  men  was  given  a  much  shorter  sentence  than  he  other¬ 
wise  would  have  received  and  the  other  one  was  released  on  pro¬ 
bation.  It  is  entirely  probable  that  if  the  court  had  appointed  some 
attorney  who  happened  to  be  in  court  at  the  time  these  men  were 
arraigned,  no  effort  would  have  been  made  to  investigate  their 
stories  to  show  if  indeed  they  were  entitled  to  consideration  on 
account  of  the  fact  that  they  were  pressed  for  something  to  do, 
were  unable  to  find  work  and  were  indeed  in  want. 

Probably  the  class  of  cases  that  calls  for  the  services  of  the 
public  defender  most  is  that  class  where  it  is  necessary  to  do  some 
investigating  to  verify  the  stories  of  the  accused  and  to  find  wit¬ 
nesses  in  their  behalf.  Often  a  defendant,  upon  asserting  his 
innocence,  will  give  the  names  of  witnesses  who  might  testify 
to  facts  tending  to  substantiate  his  contention.  If  no  means  are 
provided  for  making  investigation  or  for  examining  witnesses  for 
him,  and  if  the  attorney  appointed  by  the  court  and  working 
without  pay  does  not  care  to  do  this  work,  the  accused  will 
be  left  without  proper  representation  and  all  the  facts  will  not  be 
brought  to  the  attention  of  the  jury. 

In  the  issue  of  The  Outlook  of  January  24,  1914,  there  is  an 
article  on  “The  Schwitofsky  Case.”  The  editor,  after  citing  two 
cases  in  which  men  were  unjustly  convicted  without  a  proper 
defense,  quotes  with  approval  Mr.  Samuel  Untermyer,  who  had 
long  ago  suggested  that  there  should  be  a  public  defender. 

Too  often  criminal  prosecutions  are  commenced  by  people 
actuated  by  malice.  They  impose  upon  the  district  attorney  or 
the  justice  of  the  peace  in  having  warrants  issued.  The  com¬ 
plaining  witness  often  slights  the  most  important  points,  the 
points  that  tell  most  favorably  for  the  accused.  The  result  is 
that  the  warrant  is  issued  and  the  powerful  forces  of  the  govern¬ 
ment  are  put  into  operation  against  some  indigent  person.  The 


government  surely  should  provide  some  method  for  the  man 
without  means  to  bring  his  side  of  the  story  before  the  court. 

I  am  happy  to  state  that  thus  far  nearly  every  person  accused 
of  crime  in  the  Superior  Court,  upon  being  arraigned,  has  called 
for  the  services  of  the  public  defender  wh^  informed  that  such 
an  officer  was  available.  This  speaks  eloquently  of  the  need  of 
such  an  official.  During  the  period  from  January  7th  to  March 
13th,  inclusive,  our  office  appeared  in  sixty-four  cases  in  which 
the  defendants  were  accused  of  felonies. 

CIVIL  CASES. 

Hardly  less  in  importance  is  the  civil  side  of  our  work.  The 
number  of  calls  for  our  assistance  in  civil  matters  has  certainly 
been  surprising.  An  average  of  nearly  twenty  cases  a  day  have 
come  to  the  office  since  its  creation.  While  the  charter  provides 
that  we  shall  take  claims  not  over  one  hundred  dollars  for  poor 
people,  we  find  that  we  are  asked  for  advice  on  nearly  every 
branch  of  the  law.  Domestic  troubles  seem  to  cause  a  great  deal 
of  unhappiness  and  many  people  who  are  in  domestic  difficulties 
are  entirely  unable  to  gain  the  advice  of  someone  conversant  with 
the  law.  While  the  law  does  not  prescribe  that  we  shall  do  any¬ 
thing  whatever  with  these  matters,  we  find  that,  with  the  exercise 
of  discretion,  we  can  give  advice  in  many  cases  where  the  worthy 
poor  are  entitled  to  it.  In  fact,  our  office  has  been  turned  into 
what  might  be  called  a  legal  county  hospital.  We  are  trying  to 
remember  that  we  are  working  for  the  less  fortunate  of  humanity. 

The  costs  of  securing  redress  through  a  paid  attorney  would, 
in  many  cases,  be  greater  than  the  result  would  be  worth.  This 
condition  runs  through  nearly  all  of  the  cases  we  handle.  We 
find  that  a  letter  to  the  opposite  party  will,  in  a  majority  of  cases, 
bring  results  and  enable  us  to  adjust  disputes.  Both  parties,  in 
many  cases,  would  necessarily  lose  if  a  suit  were  filed  and  each 
side  had  to  pay  a  lawyer,  for  the  amount  involved  would  be  in¬ 
sufficient  to  justify  the  expense.  Our  office  tries  to  look  at  both 
sides  in  each  claim  and  to  tell  the  parties  what  are  their  rights. 
In  case  of  an  honest  dispute,  if  we  think  the  party  asking  for 
our  advice  has  an  enforcible  demand  we  are  ready  to  take  the 
case  into  court.  We  much  prefer  to  adjust  matters  out  of  court 
and  find  that  even  a  telephone  call  will  often  bring  about  the 
desired  result. 


We  have  tried  to  so  conduct  our  office  that  it  shall  not  be  an 
instrument  of  injustice,  even  though  at  times  parties  have  a 
strictly  legal  redress.  One  young  man  wanted  us  to  sue  a  cigar  k 

dealer  who  had  offered  to  pay  about  half  of  the  claim,  but  in¬ 
sisted  that  the  plaintiff  had  shaken  dice  for  the  other  half  and 
was  in  his  debt.  Both  parties  admitted  this  condition,  but  the 
plaintiff  asserted  that  the  gambling  debt  was  not  a  legal  set-off. 

We  informed  him  that  we  would  not  sue  for  any  sum  except  what 
was  morally  due. 

Wage  claims  are  the  most  important  of  those  that  are  pre¬ 
sented  to  our  office.  A  number  of  men  have  asked  our  services 
when  they  have  not  had  even  the  price  of  a  meal,  to  say  nothing 
of  funds  with  which  to  pay  the  costs  of  filing  a  suit  or  employing 
a  lawyer.  Argument  is  not  necessary  to  convince  that  there  is  a 
great  demand  for  a  free  legal  bureau  to  aid  men  such  as  these 
and  it  is  one  of  the  most  pleasant  parts  of  our  task  to  try  to  do 
something  to  aid  this  class  of  litigants.  Our  office  holds  that  as 
a  rule  a  man  having  a  claim  for  labor  under  one  hundred  dollars 
is  not  financially  able  to  employ  an  attorney  to  collect  it.  The 
offce  indeed  was  given  its  civil  jurisdiction  with  the  main  object 
in  view  of  securing  these  small  labor  claims  for  people  without 
adequate  means  to  enforce  their  payment.  These  small  claims 
for  wages  are  generally  more  important  to  the  poor  than  large 
sums  to  the  wealthy.  We  have  found  that  the  employers  in  nearly 
every  case  are  anxious  to  settle  when  the  public  defender  takes 
up  the  claim  for  the  employe. 

I  have  been  agreeably  surprised  to  know  that  very  few  peo¬ 
ple  have  tried  to  impose  upon  the  offce.  Nearly  every  person 
who  has  come  for  our  assistance  in  civil  matters  has  had  a  just 
claim  and  has  been  really  unable  to  employ  an  attorney.  Of  the 
few  who  have  come  when  they  were  able  to  employ  an  attorney 
the  greater  part  were  sent  by  other  offcers  who  were  not  thor-  ■ 
oughly  informed  of  the  charter  provisions  creating  our  offce. 

The  law  gives  the  laborer  the  right  to  file  a  lien  for  work 
performed  in  the  course  of  the  construction  of  a  building.  This 
lien  at  least  clouds  the  title  of  the  landlord  and  is  a  drastic  pro¬ 
cedure.  We  have  made  a  practice  of  informing  the  owner  of  the 
building  of  the  request  of  the  laborer  that  we  file  the  lien,  in  the 
hope  that  such  a  drastic  remedy  can  be  avoided.  In  fact,  we  • 

have  found  that  a  courteous  letter  written  to  the  defendant  in 
most  cases  avoids  the  necessity  of  an  action  in  court. 


It  is  a  prevalent  opinion  among  many  of  the  working  people 
of  this  country  that  the  courts  are  only  for  the  wealthy.  In  a 
limited  measure  this  is  true,  for  hundreds  of  cases  come  up  in 
every  large  city  where  poor  people  are  compelled  to  forego  their 
rights  for  the  simple  reason  that  the  expense  of  enforcing  their 
rights  is  too  heavy  a  burden.  Our  office  is  one  of  the  most  effica¬ 
cious  means  for  obtaining  justice  for  the  poor  man  and  of  making 
the  courts  truly  the  courts  of  all  the  citizens. 

The  expense  of  operating  the  office  cannot  be  considered  as 
heavy  in  view  of  the  amount  of  work  accomplished.  There  are 
now  in  the  office  of  the  public  defender  of  this  county  four 
lawyers  and  two  assistants.  The  total  monthly  expense  is  less 
than  one  thousand  dollars.  When  we  consider  that  there  are 
about  three-quarters  of  a  million  people  in  Los  Angeles  County 
and  that  the  county  is  one  of  the  richest  in  the  Union,  it  cannot 
be  considered  that  the  expense  is  great  enough  to  be  a  serious 
objection  to  the  creation  of  the  office. 

Much  interest  has  been  aroused  throughout  the  country  by 
the  creation  of  this  office  in  Los  Angeles.  Bar  associations, 
judges  and  prominent  attorneys  from  nearly  every  large  city  in 
the  United  States  have  written  for  information  on  the  subject 
and  a  number  of  the  leading  magazines  are  giving  publicity  to 
the  work.  In  almost  every  instance  the  comment  has  been  favor¬ 
able.  In  Portland,  Oregon,  the  Bar  Association  has  taken  up 
the  question  vigorously  and  has  appointed  various  members  of 
the  association  to  take  their  turn  in  acting  as  volunteer  public 
defender.  The  lawyers  of  Houston,  Texas,  are  doing  the  same 
thing  and  leading  officials  of  that  state  are  preparing  to  present 
a  bill  to  the  legislature  for  the  creation  of  the  office. 

In  Los  Angeles  we  have  met  with  the  good-will  of  the  entire 
community  and  our  work  is  being  aided  wherever  possible.  The 
judges  frequently  send  for  us  to  investigate  cases  or  to  take  up 
matters  that  cannot  be  handled  by  other  officials. 

I  am  enclosing  a  letter  just  written  by  Judge  Gavin  W.  Craig, 
who  is  presiding  in  one  of  the  criminal  departments  of  our  court 
and  before  whom  we  have  tried  most  of  our  cases. 

Yours  very  respectfully, 

WALTON  J.  WOOD 

Public  Defender. 


OFFICE  OF 


©istrict  ^ttornep 

LOS  ANGELES  COUNTY, 


Los  Angeles,  Cal.,  June  5,  1914. 

Walton  J.  Wood,  Esq., 

Public  Defender  of  Los  Angeles  County, 

Hall  of  Records,  City. 

Dear  Sir: — 

When  the  office  of  Public  defender  was  first  discussed,  I  am 
frank  to  say  the  idea  did  not  appeal  to  me ;  I  feared  the  employ¬ 
ment  in  that  office  of  some  young  attorney  whose  ambition  would 
get  the  better  of  his  judgment;  it  also  seemed  illogical,  in  that 
the  public  was  employing  an  officer  to  prosecute  only  meritorious 
cases  and  it  was  his  duty  to  dismiss  or  fail  to  prosecute  those 
he  did  not  consider  worthy  of  prosecution.  The  expense  of  the 
matter,  also,  seemed  to  be  unjustifiable. 

I  state  these  matters  frankly  because  I  wish  you  to  know 
that  since  you  have  been  actually  running  the  office  of  public 
defender  I  have  experienced  a  very  different  state  of  affairs  than 
I  apprehended.  I  still  feel  that  the  office  is  one  requiring  the 
greatest  care  in  the  selection  of  its  head,  and  am  frank  to  say  that 
the  county  should  be  congratulated  upon  your  selection.  You 
have  put  the  office  on  a  very  high  plane,  and  I  am  thoroughly 
satisfied  that  there  is  a  place  in  our  criminal  jurisprudence  for 
such  an  office  and  that  the  office  under  your  management  is 
filling  that  place  properly. 

You  are  performing  a  duty  which  this  office  has  attempted 
to  perform  in  safeguarding  the  rights  of  the  defendant;  but  I  be¬ 
lieve  under  the  circumstances  your  position  gives  you  a  better 
opportunity  to  perform  that  duty  than  the  Prosecutor  has. 

Very  sincerely  yours, 

[Signed]  J.  D.  FREDERICKS, 

District  Attorney. 


CHAMBERS  OF  DEPARTMENT  EIGHTEEN 


®fie  Superior  Court 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA 
Gavin  W.  Craig,  Judge 


March  23,  1914. 


A.  C.  Umbreit,  Esq., 

Milwaukee,  Wis. 


Dear  Sir : — 

Your  letter  of  March  13th,  addressed  to  Walton  J.  Wood, 
has  been  referred  by  him  to  me,  with  the  request  that  I  answer  it. 

The  trial  which  has  thus  far  been  given  of  the  idea  of  having 
a  Public  Defender  has  been  satisfactory.  It  is  my  belief  that  it 
will  be  an  established  office,  as  much  so  as  that  of  a  prosecuting 
attorney;  and  that  it  tends  to  the  securing  of  a  proper  and  just 
administration  of  the  law,  by,  and  in  some  cases  at  least,  securing 
for  defendants  a  more  able  defense  than  they  would  otherwise 
have ;  on  the  other  hand,  protecting  the  public  from  the  use  of 
methods  which  are  sometimes  questionable  on  the  part  of  private 
defenders. 

Very  truly  yours, 

[Signed]  GAVIN  W.  CRAIG. 


CHAMBERS  OF  DEPARTMENT  SEVENTEEN 


Superior  Court 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA 
Frank  R.  Willis,  Judge 


W.  J.  Wood,  Esq., 

Public  Defender, 

Hall  of  Records,  City. 

Dear  Sir: 


June  2,  1914. 


In  reply  to  your  inquiry  as  to  the  efficiency  of  and  necessity 
for  a  Public  Defender  in  this  county,  I  beg  to  state  that  the  work 
of  you  and  your  representatives  in  the  criminal  department  of 
the  court  has  been  of  an  eminently  satisfactory  character. 

I  find  that  instead  of  the  ordinary  method  of  defendants’ 
attorneys  in  trying  to  secure  an  acquittal  by  any  or  all  kinds 
of  means,  legitimate  or  otherwise,  the  Public  Defender  has  uni¬ 
formly  endeavored  to  present  the  facts  of  each  case  thoroughly 
to  the  jury,  and  tried  to  secure  only  such  a  verdict  as  the  facts 
of  the  case  would  warrant. 

It  has  been  a  great  saving  to  the  county  in  the  matter  of 
expense  and  has  usually  been  productive  of  a  more  fair  and  im¬ 
partial  administration  of  justice  than  the  method  formerly  em¬ 
ployed  of  appointing  attorneys  unfamiliar  with  criminal  law  to 
represent  the  defendants’  interests. 

.  I  am  well  satisfied  with  the  efficiency  of  the  office  and  of 
the  necessity  for  its  continuance  as  a  matter  of  economy  and 
justice. 

Very  truly  yours, 

(Signed)  FRANK  R.  WILLIS. 


s 


CHAMBERS  OF  DEPARTMENT  SIX 


Superior  Court 

LOS  ANGELES^,  CALIFORNIA 


Charles  Monroe,  Judge 


June  4,  1914. 

To  the  Hon.  Board  of  Supervisors  of  Los  Angeles  County: 
Gentlemen : 

I  understand  that  you  have  authorized  the  issuance  of  a 
pamphlet  in  relation  to  the  office  of  the  Public  Defender,  ex¬ 
plaining  its  workings  and  its  benefits. 

I  have  no  personal  knowledge  of  it,  except  as  I  come  in  con¬ 
tact  with  that  officer  and  his  deputies  in  connection  with  crim¬ 
inal  prosecutions  against  men  for  failing  to  provide  for  their 
wives  and  children,  and  in  that  connection  the  office  of  the  Public 
Defender  is  invaluable  to  the  proper  handling  of  those  cases; 
and  the  deputy  who  appears  here,  Mr.  William  T.  Aggeler,  is 
remarkably  well  qualified  and  efficient  for  that  purpose,  as  I 
understand  he  is  in  defending  criminal  cases. 

Prior  to  the  creation  of  the  office  of  Public  Defender  the 
court  was  required,  in  many  instances,  to  appoint  lawyers,  and 
it  was  not  satisfactory.  The  work  was  not  always  well  done, 
but  now  I  am  always  satisfied  that  the  defendant  will  be  well 
taken  care  of.  That  office  handles  the  matters  in  such  a  way 
that  they  do  not  confine  themselves  merely  to  defending  the 
men,  but  they  arrange  settlements  and  payments,  and  fix  up  so 
that  the  men  are  willing  to  support  their  children.  The  whole 
attitude  of  the  office,  so  far  as  this  department  is  concerned,  is 
endeavoring  to  avoid  litigation  instead  of  fostering  it. 

I  am  very  glad  indeed  to  say  this  on  behalf  of  the  office  of 
the  Public  Defender. 

Very  respectfully. 


CHAS.  MONROE. 


CHAMBERS  OF  DEPARTMENT  EIGHT 


^t)e  Superior  Court 

(JUVENILE  COURT) 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA 
Fred  H.  Taft,  Judge 


June  1,  1914. 

Walton  J.  Wood,  Esq.,  Public  Defender, 

Los  Angeles,  Cal. 

My  dear  Sir : 

Replying  to  your  request  for  an  expression  of  opinion  con¬ 
cerning  the  office  of  public  defender  which  you  hold,  as  gathered 
from  my  observations  and  general  knowledge  of  the  subject,  I 
beg  leave  to  say : 

The  occasional  appearance  that  your  office  has  made  in  the 
juvenile  department  of  my  court  has  been  timely  and  helpful. 
In  short,  the  purpose  and  spirit  of  your  appearance  in  this  de¬ 
partment  seems  to  me  thoroughly  to  typify  the  principle  upon 
which  your  office  was  created,  namely,  to  provide  the  unfortu¬ 
nate  with  a  proper  representation  so  that  justice  to  all  concerned 
should  be  done. 

In  the  juvenile  department  the  friends  of  those  brought  in 
for  consideration,  as  a  rule,  vie  with  the  officers  of  the  court  in 
aiding  to  bring  out  all  the  facts  connected  with  the  respective 
cases,  and  your  office  has  in  such  cases  as  it  has  become  inter¬ 
ested  in,  assisted  to  this  end. 

In  the  field  outside  the  juvenile  court  it  has  for  a  long  time 
seemed  to  me  there  was  work  for  such  an  officer  as  is  provided 
by  the  charter  under  title  of  “Public  Defender.”  I  am  inclined 
to  believe  the  short  experience  already  had  with  the  office  proves 
it,  and  that  the  future  will  confirm  the  theory  that  such  an  officer 
has  quite  as  much  utility  in  the  civil  courts  as  in  the  criminal, 
and  that  in  both  he  may  be  an  important  factor  in  subserving 
justice. 

Very  truly  yours, 

(Signed)  FRED  H.  TAFT. 


DEPARTMENT  ONE 

Sfufiticc’s  Court  of  iCoo  ^nsele£(  Sotonofiip 

Sidney  N.  Reeve,  Justice 


Los  Angeles,  CaL,  June  4th,  1914. 

Hon.  Walton  J.  Wood, 

Public  Defender, 

Hall  of  Records,  City. 

Dear  Sir : 

During  the  time  I  have  held  the  office  of  Justice  of  the  Peace 
of  Los  Angeles  Township  I  have  on  many  occasions  observed 
where  people  who  were  in  unfortunate  circumstances  were  being 
harassed  by  unscrupulous  attorneys  and  collection  agencies,  and, 
up  to  the  time  of  the  institution  of  your  office,  was  at  a  loss  just 
what  to  do  where  the  case  was  meritorious.  I  had  previously 
arranged  with  a  number  of  attorneys  to  handle  these  cases  free 
of  charge. 

Since  the  institution  of  your  office  I  have  referred  all  the 
above  class  of  people  to  you,  and  in  every  instance  they  have 
been  assisted  out  of  their  difficulties  through  the  efforts  of  your¬ 
self  and  assistants.  This  saves  the  Court  a  great  deal  of  time 
that  formerly  was  lost  by  having  to  listen  in  detail  to  these 
stories  and  also  investigating  the  records  as  to  the  condition 
of  the  various  suits,  and  explaining  to  the  people  their  rights 
and  the  remedies  that  must  necessarily  be  followed  in  order  to 
gain  them. 

I  believe  that  your  office  should  be  given  additional  powers, 
namely,  in  criminal  matters.  In  many  instances  a  person  charged 
with  the  commission  of  a  public  offense  could  be  materially 
assisted  by  your  office  if  you  appeared  at  the  time  of  the  pre¬ 
liminary  examination. 

From  what  I  have  seen  I  believe  that  your  office  is  filling  a 
long  felt  want,  and  should  be  encouraged  not  only  by  the  courts 
but  by  the  officers  of  the  county  and  by  the  public  in  general. 

Yours  very  truly, 

(Signed)  SIDNEY  N.  REEVE. 


DEPARTMENT  TWO 

justice’s!  Court  of  Xos  ^ngelesi  fEofongfitp 

J.  W.  Summerfield,  Justice 


Hon.  W.  J.  Wood, 

Public  Defender, 

Los  Angeles,  California. 

Dear  Sir : 

I  desire  to  express  to  you  my  appreciation  of  the  good  offices 
of  the  public  defender.  The  County  of  Los  Angeles  is  to  be  con¬ 
gratulated  upon  the  establishment  of  this  office,  and  it  is  with 
a  great  deal  of  satisfaction  that  I  am  able  to  corroborate  the 
many  expressions  I  have  heard  among  the  general  public  in  rela¬ 
tion  to  the  work  of  this  office,  which  is  proving  eminently  satis¬ 
factory  to  the  people  as  well  as  to  the  litigants  who  are  unable 
to  employ  the  services  of  an  attorney,  considering  the  volume  of 
work  handled,  the  manner  in  which  it  is  dispatched  and  the  re¬ 
sults  obtained  thereby  are  indeed  a  splendid  recommendation. 

It  has  been  my  observation,  during  the  past  eight  years  I 
have  presided  over  the  matters  in  this  Department  of  the  Town¬ 
ship  Court,  that  litigants  have  been  unable  to  press  their  claims, 
especially  with  reference  to  claims  for  personal  services,  because 
they  were  unable  to  employ  counsel.  Your  office  has  done  much 
good  in  this  respect.  The  office  of  the  Public  Defender  is  also 
open  to  assist  those  who  have  a  meritorious  defense  to  an  action 
brought  against  them,  but  who  are  also  unable  to  employ  coun¬ 
sel,  which  is  a  feature  to  be  commended.  The  fact  that  a  large 
percentage  of  criminal  actions  prosecuted  in  our  courts  wherein 
the  defendant  is  absolutely  without  means,  a  defense  is  guar¬ 
anteed  to  him  through  the  office  of  the  Public  Defender;  and  his 
case  may  be  fairly  and  fully  tried,  and  his  rights  amply  protected 
through  this  office,  which  has  not  heretofore  been  accorded  them. 

I  am,  indeed,  much  pleased  to  observe  the  good  that  this 
office  has  done  to  all  classes  of  litigants ;  and  the  assistance  it 
has  rendered  to  the  courts  is  very  noticeable ;  and  I  wish  to 
compliment  you  upon  the  efficient  and  thorough  manner  in  which 
you  have  administered  the  duties  of  this  office  and  trust  that  as 
the  volume  of  business  increases,  which  must  necessarily  be  the 
case  with  our  ever  increasing  population,  you  will  be  provided 
with  competent  and  necessary  assistance  in  order  that  the  func¬ 
tions  of  this  office  may  be  carried  out  in  the  same  efficient  man¬ 
ner  as  is  done  at  the  present  time. 

Very  respectfully  yours, 

(Signed)  J.  W.  SUMMERFIELD. 


Comments  of  the  Press  of  Los  Angeles 


(FROM  LOS  ANGELES  DAILY  TIMES) 

“JUSTICE  GIVEN  TO  THE  POOR— OFFICE  OF  PUBLIC 
DEFENDER  MARKED  SUCCESS— DAY  OF  TIN¬ 
HORN  LAWYER  IS  RAPIDLY  PASSING 

“Five  months  of  paid  public  defense  have  brought  nearly 
3000  cases  to  the  Public  Defender,  of  which  only  135  were  crim¬ 
inal  cases.  The  people  prosecuted  and  the  people  defended  these 
felony  cases — a  situation  unique  and  based  upon  elemental  justice. 

“The  Public  Defender  is  no  longer  an  experiment.  The  office 
is  an  established  success,  and  while  here  in  Los  Angeles,  where 
it  was  started,  it  is  jocularly  called  the  Legal  County  Hospital, 
the  movement  is  spreading  across  the  continent. 

“The  need  of  the  office  has  long  existed,  but  not  until  this 
year  was  that  need  answered  by  the  inauguration  of  a  service 
that  blasts  the  theory  that  the  courts  are  only  for  the  rich. 

“The  office  of  Public  Defender  has  shown  itself  to  be  the 
enemy  of  the  two-by-four  attorney  and  the  grasping  loan  shark. 
It  has  actually  been  a  boon  to  many  poor  persons  who  were 
oppressed,  and  under  the  guidance  of  Walton  J.  Wood,  the  head 
of  the  office,  not  a  single  instance  has  arisen  where  the  services  of 
the  Public  Defender  have  been  imposed  upon. 

Office  Is  Logical 

“Nearly  every  criminal  prosecution  is  based  upon  the  com¬ 
plaint  of  one  citizen  against  the  other.  The  prosecutor,  after 
listening  to  the  complaint  of  First  Citizen,  has  Second  Citizen 
arrested  and  then  does  everything  he  can  to  bring  about  a  con¬ 
viction,  at  the  same  time  being  fair  to  both.  The  people  pay 
for  the  prosecution,  and  why  should  not  the  people  pay  for  the 
defense,  providing  the  accused  is  unable  financially  to  pay  for 
an  attorney?  Society  demands  that  its  debts  be  paid,  but  society 
is  neither  a  taskmaster  nor  a  usurer. 


,  “Of  course,  the  court  may  appoint  an  attorney  to  defend 
a  prisoner  who  has  no  money.  But  the  appointed  counsel  usually 
is  a  young  man  without  experience,  or,  sometimes,  an  experienced 
attorney  without  time  to  do  the  defense  full  justice.  Attorneys 
can  work  much  harder  for  a  client  when  the  money  is  in  sight 
or  in  hand. 

“The  civil  business  conducted  by  the  Public  Defender  is 
naturally  the  larger  part.  Of  3000  cases  handled  in  five  months 
all  but  135  were  civil.  If  a  matter  can  be  settled  out  of  court, 
it  is  so  much  the  better.  If  not  a  complaint  is  filed.  All  the 
complainant  is  required  to  do  is  to  pay  the  filing  fee. 

Indigents  Aided 

“Mostly  the  supplicants  who  fill  the  office  of  the  Public  De¬ 
fender  are  indigent.  Their  claims  are  petty.  No  matter  what 
the  complaint,  there  is  always  a  reception  for  them  and  careful 
attention  to  their  cases. 

“The  Public  Defender  does  not  discourage  pleas  of  guilty, 
unless  his  client  is  insane,  nor  does  he  resort  to  tricky  or  un¬ 
fair  methods  to  conceal  a  crime.  Actually,  he  co-operates  with 
the  District  Attorney,  and  the  prosecution  of  an  indigent  pris¬ 
oner,  as  well  as  the  defense,  is  immensely  fair. 

How  It  Works 

“The  Public  Defender  came  in  contact  with  a  woman  whose 
husband  sued  her  for  divorce.  She  asked  him  to  defend  her  case. 
The  Public  Defender  agreed,  but  wanted  $3  from  her  with  which 
to  pay  a  fee  for  filing  an  answer.  She  did  not  have  the  money 
and  the  office  funds  do  not  provide  the  expense.  Wood  tele¬ 
phoned  the  husband’s  lawyer  and  the  spirit  of  the  public  de¬ 
fense  impelled  the  attorney  to  accept  the  challenge.  Out  of  the 
complaining  husband’s  fee  he  paid  $3  for  the  defendant  wife’s 
answer. 

“Jailers,  turnkeys  and  others  send  cases  to  the  Public  De¬ 
fender,  and  the  day  of  the  attorney  who  preys  upon  prisoners 
is  passing. 

“Chief  among  the  purposes  of  the  office  is  to  acquaint  the 
poor  with  their  rights.  Often  they  are  imposed  upon  in  their 


ignorance,  but  the  Public  Defender  sees  to  it  that  any  man,  in 
jail  or  out,  gets  free  information  on  his  rights  among  his  fellow- 
men.” 


(FROM  TH-E  TRIBUNE) 

“Los  Angeles  county  now  has  an  official  who  is  designated 
‘public  defender.’  This  is  not  an  entirely  novel  idea  and  yet  it 
is  an  innovation  here  and  an  outgrowth  of  the  new  and  humane 
trend  of  our  broader  social  life.  The  public  employment  of  an 
official,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  represent  persons  financially 
unable  to  secure  legal  representation  in  criminal  actions  or  in 
civil  suits,  is  made  the  more  necessary  from  the  fact  that  the 
real  province  of  the  public  prosecutor  has  been  misunderstood 
and  his  activities  have  been  diverted  from  the  original  and  true 
theory  of  the  law. 

“The  true  province  of  a  district  attorney  is  not  primarily 
to  secure  the  conviction  of  a  prisoner  at  bar.  He  is,  in  the 
original  and  true  theory  of  the  law,  a  minister  of  justice  charged 
with  the  duty  of  assisting  the  trial  judge  and  the  jury  to  admin¬ 
ister  even  justice  in  the  case  on  trial,  whether  it  shall  result  in 
acquittal  or  conviction. 

“In  practice,  and  in  the  general  popular  view,  a  district  at¬ 
torney  must  be  a  terror  to  evil  doers  and  therefore  a  sleuthhound 
of  the  law  with  a  thirst  for  vengeance  against  all  charged  with 
crime.  He  is  in  most  communities  adjudged  a  success,  as  he 
secures  conviction,  regardless  of  the  humanities  of  the  case. 

“There  is  need  of  a  public  defender,  that  the  poor  may  have 
even  justice  in  our  criminal  courts  and  a  representative  in  actions 
for  wages  and  the  like.  The  comparatively  limited  equipment 
of  the  office  makes  it  still  needful  that  justice  rather  than  convic¬ 
tion  be  the  key-note  of  all  criminal  prosecutions.” 


(FROM  THE  EXPRESS) 

“It  is  exactly  as  much  the  duty  of  the  state  to  spend  its 
money  to  protect  the  innocent  as  it  is  its  duty  to  spend  its  money 
to  punish  the  guilty.  The  office  representing  the  state,  in  the 
one  instance,  should  be  as  fully  equipped  for  the  discharge  of 
its  duty  as  is  the  no  more  important  office  representing  the  op¬ 
posing  side  of  the  state’s  activities.” 


(FROM  THE  CALIFORNIA  OUTLOOK) 

‘Tt  is  interesting  to  note  that,  almost  without  exception,  those 
litigants  who  were  offered  the  alternative  of  an  attorney  to  be 
assigned  by  the  court  expressed  a  preference  for  the  services 
of  the  public  defender.  The  need  for  such  an  official  is  thus 
incontestably  demonstrated. 

“The  public  prosecutor,  it  is  true,  in  the  highest  conception 
of  the  office  is  bound  to  attempt  to  reach  the  truth  as  to  the 
guilt  or  innocence  of  each  defendant  whom  he  prosecutes.  But 
conditions  that  have  grown  up  require  vigorous  prosecutions,  and 
the  aphorism  that  ‘no  man  can  serve  two  masters’  is  just  as 
applicable  to  this  duty  as  to  any  other.  The  solution  then  is 
for  the  prosecuting  attorney  and  the  public  defender  to  work 
harmoniously  together  with  the  sole  object  of  promoting  justice. 
But  the  criminal  side  is  likely  to  be  a  comparatively  unimportant 
part  of  the  work  of  the  public  defender’s  office.  On  the  civil 
side  his  clients  are  to  be  those  who  are  persecuted  or  harassed 
or  imposed  upon  and  who  are  unable  to  help  themselves.  In 
such  cases  he  is  answering  the  call  of  humanity.  And  Los  An¬ 
geles  County  is  entitled  to  a  feeling  of  honest  pride  for  having 
made  this  provision  for  the  needs  of  the  least  fortunate  of  its 
citizens.  The  incumbent  has  a  high  conception  of  his  duties, 
and  already  the  office  has  justified  its  existence.” 


PROVISIONS  OF  COUNTY  CHARTER 


Sec.  23.  Upon  request  by  the  defendant  or  upon  order  of  the 
court,  the  Public  Defender  shall  defend,  without  expense  to  them, 
all  persons  who  are  not  financially  able  to  employ  counsel  and 
who  are  charged,  in  the  Superior  Court,  with  the  commission 
of  any  contempt,  misdemeanor,  felony  or  other  offense.  He  shall 
also,  upon  request,  give  counsel  and  advice  to  such  persons,  in 
and  about  any  charge  against  them  upon  which  he  is  conducting 
the  defense,  and  he  shall  prosecute  all  appeals  to  a  higher  court 
or  courts,  of  any  person  who  has  been  convicted  upon  any  such 
charge,  where,  in  his  opinion,  such  appeal  will,  or  might  reason¬ 
ably  be  expected  to,  result  in  the  reversal  or  modification  of  the 
judgment  of  conviction. 

He  shall  also,  upon  request,  prosecute  actions  for  the  collec¬ 
tion  of  wages  and  of  other  demands  of  persons  who  are  not  finan¬ 
cially  able  to  employ  counsel,  in  cases  in  which  the  sum  involved 
does  not  exceed  $100,  and  in  which,  in  the  judgment  of  the  Pub¬ 
lic  Defender,  the  claims  urged  are  valid  and  enforceable  in  the 
courts. 

He  shall  also,  upon  request,  defend  such  persons  in  all  civil 
litigation  in  which,  in  his  judgment,  they  are  being  persecuted 
or  unjustly  harassed. 

The  costs  in  all  actions  in  which  the  Public  Defender  shall 
appear  under  this  section,  whether  for  plaintiffs  or  for  defendants, 
shall  be  paid  out  of  the  County  Treasury,  at  the  times  and  in 
the  manner  required  by  law,  or  by  rules  of  court,  and  under  a 
system  of  demand,  audit  and  payment  which  shall  be  prescribed 
by  the  Board  of  Supervisors.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Public 
Defender,  in  all  such  litigation,  to  procure,  if  possible,  in  addition 
to  general  judgments  in  favor  of  the  persons  whom  he  shall  repre¬ 
sent  therein,  judgments  for  costs  and  attorney’s  fees,  where  per¬ 
missible,  against  the  opponents  of  such  persons,  and  collect  and 
pay  the  same  into  the  County  Treasurer. 


5iaT.;..;io 


.V  -Sv'V 


.  axft  to  ■:■:•  >?•.  '  ;/  10  . 

Of-^As  .  ) 

.  '■  iur,;  i’'=^ijna^:  .  j.c  •;,'  .  ^ 

fro/A'aitn/fiO')  .  ';  i[j!'.t  , 


:1 


-''idi'  ff  :v^.  f. :  'wivl' 


i  i/i* .  i-jrifr*: .  :  31 

’'fjji-  '  /(l,  ',  f|/,  j| 

:  •■t  lift  hi  /,ffy 

'r"r  ■  '  *  —  7<  w  *■  . 


»'■  ,t:> 

ff ‘J f;-:^ . Y IJ ••  u ‘ t j  7<* y ,/  , , • , . 

>}*•  V' 

-  ■  ■•»"■;•:  jrf'.'ir'ri .-•:;)  .'ih.,  n, 

..  irff^^..*;. ::y«S 

i  n 

!'ri/  U;  -m  i'  ..^•.  .<i> 

-  hr”-  •hor/'T.  •  : 

■*  "n  *  '  ,  ^  '  • 

-'}'  h'  .•;  '}.'!f  r/ 

-rru:..t  ‘orrDts  v'>;’7 

-;:r  -jii'  rtu 


•'  -n^.  '  ;  :»^r^  ^  1  n^9i/‘  .- f.tk 

V  * 'A'  - 'lit  t.  ■ 


►  **■  f  m  •%  _  k 

^  ■ '  nr  .,;  ■ 


» • 


'-  .tr. 

I 


i'/i'j  If  ;  /.'*•  ff'i:;- 

7vri:o=-]3c  :  '  ovr  v^i 


Kjiifv.  't^r..77)H{^  oifcf/hj  •_> 

.8inr.L'’i  >bn  -"o)  *to  jjVtHrr;.  •  TOi  tj 

rr: -riiiVi  ..  ’/  J:  ,v-: 

ii  *r  jf  air  .I  r.K  O  hi  • 

:  T^-;; ;  :-'-j  :.f  :;■  I '.  <'({-:  ihi; 

v'li  :■  >  .  .  :!L,  00.  '  ) 


- 11^: 

•'*  S'  *-•;  ■  5*^  •>  4  1"'  ^ 

'•  ^J4-  '  j  ./  .  4IJ,  III.  ir-'ex.^  -  •  ' 


- 


•  iv: 


.'  "!  h' 

•  I .»( *4 


:•:  f' 


ifP  !•)  S  * 

r  V<I  •:  i  ..7*':  ^{d  “lii.  ?rf| 

.  ;  *' ']  ;  .HirKfif' /h  1  .  . 

"  ■  1  •  in* 

.'■-  •■•^r/ ,3<h  \-\ln'W  \  3///  ,y 

I  ri'  •'  ,;JS  ?I  ,  ' 

7 :'/'<! r(  'fvi 

.  nJ  i\ 


•  >  r  ■ 


rr>:7.'  7’  ](  .*,  .rvt/f  <./  ,•■■  7..;^ 

•  ■  1  '  r  * 

j  J  1  ;  i  *'  f  .  t  .  >  .i  i/  V/'  >*'  T  "  '  '■ 

-V'*;  .f  /  .  -  j'jI  f>'yaaTr>’ .;-.ji.,i>f" 

I.u:  •  1  •uli'O  Lrf,r  ,:.,(jo<i'<-i.-f  .  ■:;/ijQoc|q(>4  ;'7;riv;j^ ,^h»‘ -.•  i-;t 

'[T  V  *>rh^  .ii  r^iqOf 


r 


/ 


y. 


1^: 


K  I 


A  1-.  : 


Gaylord  Bros. 
Makers 

Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
PAT.  JAN.  21,1908 


■■'  '■■■' '  '^r-r.  ■•  .■■■''^- Jv  vfeM 

r-  i'\f^'  •*!  ■■•V  -  v  '  ,  -V  '  V7’ — ,;  W.a&B 

yi^ ! .  ^  .■'i-'-r  '  -Lv  ^  ^ '■'f  i'-Tij 


„.„..-J  <v,.  ■  j,-.  j-^  U-  'f-'-'*-:. 

JjK,  •  -  •  :^s  *  ■  ^  •  ••'  --  ■ ;.  v-i?  5  • » 

.  V- •  ,^  . i;d '• 


>»  , w 

tj^'">'  _,  •  ■  --  ■=■  •»&««> 


lpp#@S  'r-:::  ■■: 


. 


POy':-:;™  SS 

■,>"  t/f.  .  .v.,  ft-  .  j’,  _ _ jL-.- SflfW 


4a  Wo'. 


fvY ?-?•'•■  •■  >  V,-  -.:  '1 

■Hlf^ -.  •!'•  \t  ■  |■'•v’.<J^^ 


